Machine learning platforms face the same enterprise procurement gates as other B2B software companies, but they run more specialized infrastructure behind the scenes: training pipelines, model repositories, feature stores, GPU fleets, vector databases, and inference APIs alongside standard cloud systems. When a security team requests a SOC 2 report before signing, the ML company must answer the same core questions: Who examines the controls? What does the audit cover? How much will it cost? SOC 2 audit services for machine learning platforms can help companies prepare for and navigate that process, but providers do not all offer the same thing.
We evaluate 12 providers, from CPA firms that perform SOC 2 examinations to compliance platforms that help companies prepare for them, so ML founders, CTOs, and security leads can shortlist the right option with a clear understanding of what each provider does and doesn’t do.
Why Machine Learning Platforms Need SOC 2
Enterprise buyers often request SOC 2 reports before approving ML vendors, especially when they handle customer data, models, prompts, or telemetry.
ML platforms also run complex infrastructure, including cloud systems, GPUs, Kubernetes, data pipelines, model repositories, and APIs, that requires strong security controls.
SOC 2 helps companies demonstrate that they manage key areas such as:
- Access controls: Protecting datasets, models, production systems, and credentials.
- Data security: Managing data throughout collection, storage, training, inference, retention, and deletion.
- Infrastructure security: Securing cloud, GPU, Kubernetes, and development environments.
- Pipeline security: Protecting CI/CD systems, training pipelines, API keys, and other secrets.
For ML companies, SOC 2 can provide the security assurance enterprise customers need to move procurement forward.
Top 12 Best SOC 2 Audit Services for Machine Learning Platforms
1. A-LIGN
A-LIGN is a technology-enabled cybersecurity compliance firm and, by its own account, the number one global issuer of SOC 2 reports, having completed over 16,000 audits since its founding in 2009. It is an independent audit firm first, with its own platform, A-SCEND, supporting the audit relationship rather than replacing it.
Does It Perform the SOC 2 Audit? Yes. A-LIGN’s CPA practice performs the SOC 2 examination and issues the report.
Why It Fits Machine Learning Platforms: A-LIGN’s scale and multi-framework bench make it a reasonable fit for ML platforms selling into regulated or government-adjacent markets. Beyond SOC 2, the firm works across frameworks and programs including FedRAMP, HITRUST, PCI, and ISO. That breadth can help an ML company that expects to need additional compliance programs as it moves into larger or more regulated markets.
Features
- SOC 1, SOC 2, and SOC 3 examinations
- SOC 2 Type I and Type II
- Multi-framework audits under one engagement
- A-SCEND platform for coordinating evidence with the audit team
Pricing:
- Official pricing: Not publicly disclosed
- Pricing model: Custom quote
Pros:
- Highest reported audit volume in the market
- Broad multi-framework capabilities under one firm
- Strong brand recognition with enterprise security reviewers
- Established track record with regulated-industry buyers
Cons:
- Higher-touch sales process than boutique firms
- Pricing is not published, so buyers need a sales conversation to budget accurately
- May offer more scale and capability than a very early-stage ML startup needs for a first Type I audit
Best For: Enterprise AI vendors that expect to need FedRAMP, HITRUST, or ISO alongside SOC 2.
Verdict. Best if: your roadmap includes government or regulated-industry customers and you want one firm covering multiple frameworks over time. Consider another provider if: you’re a seed-stage ML startup that only needs a first, narrow-scope SOC 2 Type I quickly and cheaply.
2. Schellman
Schellman is a Top 50 CPA firm built specifically around IT audit and attestation work rather than general accounting. It is the only Top 50 CPA firm to specialize in IT Audit and Cybersecurity, and the firm also holds PCI QSA, ISO certification body, HITRUST assessor, and FedRAMP 3PAO credentials.
Does It Perform the SOC 2 Audit? Yes.
Why It Fits Machine Learning Platforms: Schellman is one of the more clearly documented fits for AI-specific work in this list. The firm is also described elsewhere as the first ANAB-accredited ISO 42001 certification body. For an ML platform that expects to need both SOC 2 and ISO/IEC 42001, having one firm accredited for both can reduce coordination overhead.
Features
- SOC 1, SOC 2, and SOC 3
- ISO 27001 certification
- ISO 42001 certification
- PCI QSA assessments
- HITRUST assessments
- FedRAMP assessments
- Published methodology for evaluating AI-specific controls
Pricing:
- Official pricing: Not publicly disclosed
- Pricing model: Custom quote
- Market estimate: Third-party trackers cite AI-company SOC 2 engagements starting around $20,000
Pros:
- Genuine, named AI/ISO 42001 practice rather than a generic claim of “AI experience”
- SOC-focused firm rather than a broad general-audit practice
- Strong credential stack, including CPA, ISO certification body, PCI QSA, and FedRAMP 3PAO capabilities
- Can potentially support multiple security and AI-governance requirements under one firm
Cons:
- Premium pricing compared with boutique firms
- Likely overkill for a very small ML startup that only needs a narrow-scope Type I
- Quote-only pricing makes early budgeting harder
Best For: ML platforms facing high enterprise scrutiny that want SOC 2 and ISO 42001 handled by the same accredited firm.
Verdict: Best if: enterprise buyers are asking pointed questions about your AI governance controls, not just general security. Consider another provider if: budget is the primary constraint and you don’t yet need ISO 42001.
3. Coalfire
Coalfire is a cybersecurity advisory and assessment firm with SOC 2 as one part of a broader compliance portfolio, issuing reports through its licensed CPA affiliate. It issues SOC reports through Coalfire Controls, its licensed CPA firm affiliate, giving audits full AICPA standing.
Does It Perform the SOC 2 Audit? Yes, through its CPA affiliate.
Why It Fits Machine Learning Platforms: Coalfire’s differentiator is its federal and regulated-industry depth. The firm operates as one of the largest FedRAMP 3PAOs in the United States by engagement volume. For ML platforms selling into government, defense, or heavily regulated buyers alongside commercial customers, that depth can matter more than pure commercial SaaS experience.
Features
- SOC 1, SOC 2, and SOC 3
- FedRAMP assessments
- CMMC
- HITRUST
- PCI
- Ability to layer additional federal compliance programs onto an existing relationship
- Potential evidence reuse across programs
Pricing:
- Official pricing: Not publicly disclosed
- Pricing model: Custom quote
- Market estimate: Third-party estimates place Coalfire in a premium band of roughly $25,000–$80,000 for a full engagement
Pros:
- Strong federal and FedRAMP depth
- Good fit for ML platforms with government or defense ambitions
- Ability to add CMMC or FedRAMP to a broader compliance roadmap
- Established enterprise credibility
Cons:
- Premium positioning compared with commercial-only SaaS specialists
- Likely more firm than an ML startup needs if it has no regulated-industry customers
- Larger engagements can reportedly take 6–9 months, depending on scope
Best For: ML platforms with government, defense, or regulated-industry customers alongside commercial ones.
Verdict: Best if: federal or CMMC-adjacent business is realistically on your roadmap. Consider another provider if: your buyers are purely commercial SaaS security teams—you may pay for capabilities you do not need.
4. Johanson Group
Johanson Group is a boutique, Colorado-based CPA firm built around SOC examinations. It positions itself for startups and mid-market companies that want a credentialed auditor without Big Four overhead.
Does It Perform the SOC 2 Audit? Yes.
Why It Fits Machine Learning Platforms: Johanson Group commonly works with clients using Drata, Vanta, Secureframe, and Sprinto, so an ML startup already running one of these platforms can expect a familiar handoff process. The firm also holds IAS accreditation as an ISO 27001 certification body, which can be useful if ISO 27001 follows SOC 2 on the roadmap.
Features
- SOC 1, SOC 2, and SOC 3
- ISO 27001 certification
- HIPAA audits
- Published 4–6 week turnaround from audit kickoff to final report delivery
Pricing:
- Official pricing: Not publicly listed
- Pricing model: Custom quote
Pros:
- Fast, documented turnaround for time-sensitive enterprise deals
- Fixed-fee, partner-led engagements
- Works with major compliance platforms
- Flexible payment terms have been reported for cash-conscious startups
Cons:
- No documented AI/ML-specific practice
- Smaller firm size means less bench depth for very large or multi-entity engagements
- Pricing requires a sales conversation to confirm
Best For: Early-stage ML startups that need a fast, fixed-fee SOC 2 report to unblock a specific enterprise deal.
Verdict: Best if: speed and a fixed fee matter more than brand-name recognition. Consider another provider if: you need documented AI-specific audit experience or are pursuing FedRAMP or HITRUST alongside SOC 2.
5. Prescient Security
Prescient Security is a multi-framework CPA and security assessment firm with a global auditor footprint. It describes itself as a global leader in multi-framework compliance auditing, security assessments, and penetration testing, with senior auditors across the U.S., EMEA, and APAC supporting 25+ compliance frameworks for 5,000+ clients.
Does It Perform the SOC 2 Audit? Yes.
Why It Fits Machine Learning Platforms: Prescient’s global, time-zone-aligned auditor coverage can benefit ML platforms with distributed engineering teams or international customers. The firm can also provide penetration testing alongside the SOC 2 engagement, potentially allowing an ML company with production APIs to consolidate two vendor relationships.
Features
- SOC 1, SOC 2, and SOC 3
- 25+ compliance frameworks
- Penetration testing
- Multi-region auditor staffing
- Multi-framework compliance support
Pricing:
- Official pricing: Not publicly disclosed
- Pricing model: Custom quote
Pros:
- Competitive pricing among CPA-licensed firms
- Global, time-zone-aligned auditor availability
- Penetration testing available from the same vendor
- Broad framework coverage
Cons:
- No documented AI/ML-specific methodology found in public sources
- Broad coverage across 25+ frameworks may mean less specialization in an individual framework compared with SOC-focused firms such as Schellman
Best For: Cost-conscious ML startups that want a CPA-licensed firm and may need multiple frameworks or penetration testing from one vendor.
Verdict: Best if: budget is a real constraint and you want a global-hours auditor team. Consider another provider if: you specifically need documented AI or ISO 42001 audit experience.
6. BARR Advisory
BARR Advisory is a cloud-focused cybersecurity and compliance firm. Founded in 2014 the Kansas City-based firm serves startups and Fortune 1000 companies and operates in more than 20 countries. It is among the U.S. firms accredited for both ISO 27001 certification and SOC 2 audits.
Does It Perform the SOC 2 Audit? Yes.
Why It Fits Machine Learning Platforms: BARR’s cloud-native, remote-first practice is built around companies whose infrastructure largely runs in the cloud, making it a reasonable fit for ML platforms running training and inference on AWS, GCP, or Azure. Its adaptive audits aim to reduce client effort, and the team includes professionals with CPA, CISA, CISSP, and CIPP credentials.
Features
- SOC 2 Type I and Type II
- ISO 27001 certification
- Dual SOC 2 and ISO 27001 accreditation
- Adaptive audit approach
- Fixed-rate engagements
- Remote-first audit model
Pricing:
- Official pricing: Not publicly listed
- Pricing model: Custom quote
Pros:
- Dual SOC 2 and ISO 27001 accreditation under one firm
- Cloud-native audit approach suited to cloud-hosted ML infrastructure
- Remote-first structure supports distributed engineering teams
- Fixed-rate pricing model can reduce surprise scope changes
- Experience serving both startups and larger enterprises
Cons:
- No published AI-specific practice comparable with Schellman’s
- Boutique size may mean longer lead times during peak audit periods
- Pricing is not published
Best For: Cloud-native ML startups that want SOC 2 and ISO 27001 handled by the same accredited firm.
Verdict: Best if: your infrastructure is fully cloud-hosted and you expect to need ISO 27001 alongside SOC 2. Consider another provider if: you need a documented AI/ISO 42001-specific practice.
7. Linford & Co
Linford & Company is a long-standing, SOC-focused CPA firm known for serving startups and smaller organizations on a budget-conscious basis.
Does It Perform the SOC 2 Audit? Yes. Linford & Company specializes in SOC 1, SOC 2, and HIPAA audits, with services designed to support compliance and protect the integrity of financial and operational controls.
Why It Fits Machine Learning Platforms: Reviewers consistently position Linford as a startup-friendly option. The firm works well for smaller organizations where budget is a key consideration. While public sources do not document an ML-specific specialization, its SOC-focused practice and reputation for working with lean teams make it a reasonable option for an early-stage ML company running a straightforward compliance program.
Features
- SOC 1 audits
- SOC 2 audits
- HIPAA audits
- SOC-focused audit practice
- Services designed for startups and smaller organizations
Pricing:
- Official pricing: Not publicly listed
- Pricing model: Custom quote
Pros:
- Reputation for budget-friendly, startup-appropriate pricing
- SOC-focused practice
- Long operating history in the SOC 2 market
- Potentially good fit for lean compliance teams
Cons:
- No documented AI/ML-specific audit experience in public sources
- Narrower framework catalog than firms such as Prescient Assurance or A-LIGN
- May require a separate provider for ISO 27001 or ISO 42001 later
Best For: Budget-conscious early-stage ML startups running a straightforward SOC 2 with no immediate multi-framework requirement.
Verdict: Best if: you want one of the lower-cost options among CPA-licensed firms. Consider another provider if: you’ll need ISO 42001 or FedRAMP in the near term.
8. Vanta
Vanta is a compliance automation platform, not an audit firm. It connects to cloud, identity, and developer tooling to collect evidence continuously and prepare it for an independent auditor.
Does It Perform the SOC 2 Audit? No. Vanta organizes evidence and monitors controls; a separately engaged, licensed CPA firm performs the examination and issues the report. Some Vanta plans bundle audit coordination with partner auditors, but the audit itself remains a distinct engagement.
Why It Fits Machine Learning Platforms: Vanta’s integration catalog, reported at 580+ integrations, covers major cloud providers, identity systems, and developer tools that an ML platform may use. Its evidence engine can also collect information continuously instead of requiring teams to manually assemble screenshots and documentation before an audit window.
Features
- Continuous control monitoring
- Automated evidence collection
- Policy templates generated from business context
- Public trust center
- Partner network of auditors
- Integrations with cloud, identity, developer, and business tools
- Multi-framework compliance support
Pricing:
- Official pricing: Not publicly disclosed
- Plans: Essentials, Plus, Professional, and Enterprise
- Pricing model: Quote-based
Pros:
- Large integration catalog
- Strong brand recognition with enterprise security teams
- Continuous evidence collection
- Supports multiple frameworks
- Useful for ML teams with many cloud and SaaS dependencies
Cons:
- Quote-only pricing makes early budgeting difficult
- Independent audit fees are generally a separate cost unless explicitly bundled
- Per-framework and employee-based pricing can increase costs as the company scales
Best For: ML teams that want broad infrastructure and tooling coverage for automated evidence collection.
Verdict: Best if: your infrastructure spans many cloud and SaaS tools and you want broad integration coverage. Consider another provider if: you want the audit and compliance platform bundled into a single contract; Thoropass may be a better fit.
9. Drata
Drata is a compliance automation platform positioned around control customization and multi-framework reuse. It supports 30+ frameworks, including NIST 800-53, CMMC 2.0, ISO 42001, NIS 2, and DORA, alongside more than 300 integrations.
Does It Perform the SOC 2 Audit? No. Drata provides compliance software that helps organizations collect evidence and prepare for an audit. The final SOC 2 report comes from a CPA organization that performs the independent examination.
Why It Fits Machine Learning Platforms: Drata’s inclusion of ISO 42001 in its framework catalog is particularly relevant to ML platforms planning an AI-governance roadmap alongside SOC 2. Companies can potentially manage evidence and controls for both frameworks through the same compliance system instead of introducing separate evidence workflows.
Features
- Continuous control monitoring
- Automated evidence collection
- 300+ integrations
- Risk management
- Compliance-as-code capabilities
- Multi-framework compliance
- ISO 42001 support
Pricing:
- Official pricing: Quote-based
- Pricing model: Custom quote
Pros:
- ISO 42001 support is already included in its framework catalog
- Strong multi-framework reuse
- Useful for companies pursuing SOC 2 alongside ISO 27001, NIST, or AI-governance frameworks
- Large integration catalog
- Strong fit for engineering-led compliance teams
Cons:
- Pricing can increase with employee and framework count
- Audit fees remain separate
- Enterprise pricing can exceed $100,000 per year at scale according to third-party reporting
- May be more platform than a very early-stage startup needs
Best For:Engineering-led ML teams planning to pursue SOC 2 and ISO 42001, or other AI-adjacent frameworks, together.
Verdict: Best if: your roadmap includes multiple frameworks, including AI-governance standards, and you want one evidence system across them. Consider another provider if: you’re pre-revenue and need the lowest possible entry price; Sprinto or Secureframe may offer a more cost-conscious starting point.
10. Secureframe
Secureframe is a compliance automation platform positioned between Vanta and Drata on price, with a stronger emphasis on hands-on guidance for first-time SOC 2 buyers.
Does It Perform the SOC 2 Audit? No. Secureframe helps companies collect evidence and prepare for the audit, but a licensed CPA firm conducts the SOC 2 examination and issues the final report.
Why It Fits Machine Learning Platforms: Secureframe can work well for ML startups without a dedicated compliance specialist. Its guided approach is particularly useful when the security lead or founding engineer also manages compliance alongside their core technical responsibilities.
Features
- Automated evidence collection across cloud, identity, and code repository integrations.
- AI-assisted policy drafting and evidence validation.
- Support for 35+ compliance frameworks.
- Access to a vetted audit-partner network.
- Compliance guidance designed to support teams through their first or second SOC 2 audit.
- Support for cloud companies with complex or custom environments.
Pricing
- Pricing model: Quote-based.
- Reported starting price: Around $7,500 per year for SOC 2 compliance software, excluding audit fees.
Pros
- Dedicated compliance support or a compliance manager may be available on higher tiers, which can help teams without an internal GRC or compliance hire.
- Its audit-partner network can reduce the time and effort required to find an auditor.
- AI-assisted evidence validation can reduce manual compliance work.
- Supports multiple frameworks, making it suitable for ML companies that expect their compliance requirements to expand.
Cons
- Some features may be gated based on company size or plan level, which can become restrictive as a startup grows.
- Additional frameworks may increase the overall cost.
- The CPA audit fee remains separate, so buyers need to budget for both the platform and the audit.
Best For: First-time ML SOC 2 buyers without a dedicated compliance hire who want more guidance throughout the process.
Verdict.
Best if: you want hands-on guidance and a clear point of contact to help you navigate your first SOC 2 audit. Consider another provider if: you already have strong in-house compliance expertise and primarily want a lower-cost automation platform. Sprinto may offer a more affordable entry point.
11. Sprinto
Sprinto is an automation-first compliance platform designed primarily for cloud-native SaaS companies. It uses a flexible, feature-based pricing approach rather than relying entirely on rigid pricing tiers.
Does It Perform the SOC 2 Audit? No. Sprinto provides the compliance automation platform, while an independent CPA firm performs the SOC 2 audit and issues the report. Sprinto partners with major SOC 2 audit firms and provides an auditor portal that allows auditors to access and review evidence directly.
Why It Fits Machine Learning Platforms: Sprinto can be a strong option for ML startups that want to choose their own auditor rather than work with a bundled audit provider. For example, a company could use Sprinto for evidence automation while hiring Schellman for its AI-specific or ISO 42001 expertise.
Features
- Continuous and AI-assisted compliance monitoring.
- Automated evidence collection.
- SOC 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA and GDPR
- Auditor portal for direct evidence access and collaboration.
- Support for automated evidence sharing with independent auditors.
- Flexible compliance configuration based on the frameworks and features a company needs.
Pricing
Pricing model: Quote-based.
Reported entry pricing: Approximately $4,000–$5,000 per year for smaller companies, according to third-party sources.
Reported higher-end pricing: Can reach $30,000+ per year as company size and compliance requirements increase.
Audit fees: Separate from the platform subscription.
Reported boutique Type II audit costs: Approximately $7,500–$20,000, depending on scope and auditor.
Pricing checked: August 2026.
All figures should be treated as planning estimates rather than official Sprinto pricing.
Pros
- One of the lowest reported entry prices among the compliance automation platforms in this comparison.
- Flexible pricing model allows companies to pay for the features and frameworks they need.
- Auditor-agnostic approach gives ML companies more freedom to choose their own CPA firm.
- Can be paired with specialist auditors, including firms with AI or ISO 42001 expertise.
- Continuous monitoring and automated evidence collection reduce manual compliance work.
Cons
- Has less enterprise brand recognition than Vanta or Drata among some security and procurement teams.
- Enterprise capabilities may be less mature for highly complex organizations.
- Its integration catalog may be smaller than Vanta or Drata for large ML platforms with extensive multi-cloud and SaaS environments.
Best For: Cost-conscious, cloud-native ML startups that want compliance automation without being tied to a specific audit firm.
Verdict.
Best if: budget is your main concern and you want the flexibility to independently choose your CPA auditor.
12. Thoropass
Thoropass, formerly Laika, takes a hybrid approach by combining compliance automation with access to a connected CPA audit engagement under a single commercial relationship.
Does It Perform the SOC 2 Audit? Yes, through a connected CPA firm relationship. This is one of Thoropass’s main differentiators from pure compliance platforms. However, buyers should confirm the identity of the signing CPA firm, the legal structure of the engagement, and the independence safeguards before signing.
Why It Fits Machine Learning Platforms: Thoropass can simplify the process for ML startups that do not want to manage separate relationships with a compliance software provider and an audit firm. It combines compliance automation, audit coordination, and ongoing compliance into a more consolidated process. Its support for both SOC 2 and ISO 42001 can also appeal to ML platforms building an AI governance roadmap alongside their security compliance program.
Features
- Compliance automation platform combined with a connected audit engagement.
- Support for:
- SOC 2, ISO 27001, ISO 42001, HIPAA, PCI DSS and HITRUST
- Control mapping across multiple compliance frameworks.
- Risk register and vendor-tracking capabilities.
- Bundled compliance and audit workflow under one commercial relationship.
- Penetration testing add-ons, with retesting included in some packages.
- Support for SOC 2 and ISO 42001 within the same broader compliance engagement.
Pricing
Around $8,700 annually for the platform, plus approximately $5,800 for a SOC 2 audit, according to one third-party review.
Pros
- Combines compliance software and audit coordination into a single vendor relationship.
- Can reduce the administrative burden of managing separate platform and audit vendors.
- Supports both SOC 2 and ISO 42001, making it relevant for ML companies developing an AI governance roadmap.
- Risk and vendor management tools provide broader compliance functionality beyond basic evidence collection.
- May be more cost-efficient than buying a compliance platform and audit separately, depending on scope and package.
Cons
- Provides less flexibility to independently choose an auditor compared with Sprinto, Drata, or Secureframe.
- Public pricing estimates vary widely, making it difficult to budget accurately without a direct quote.
- Buyers should verify the audit entity, legal separation, and independence safeguards rather than assuming all audit arrangements work the same way.
- The bundled model may not suit companies that already have a preferred CPA audit firm.
Best For: ML startups that want one primary vendor relationship covering compliance automation and SOC 2 audit coordination, with the option to add ISO 42001.
Verdict.
Best if: you want to consolidate compliance automation and audit management into one contract and one renewal cycle.
Conclusion: What to Look for in a SOC 2 Audit Service for ML Infrastructure
When comparing SOC 2 audit services for machine learning platforms, focus on whether the provider understands your actual infrastructure rather than relying on broad claims about AI or cloud expertise.
- Cloud infrastructure: Confirm experience with your specific cloud provider, containers, Kubernetes environment, and GPU infrastructure.
- Identity and access: Verify support for your actual identity provider and access-control setup.
- Developer tools: Confirm compatibility with your code repositories, CI/CD tools, and issue-tracking systems.
- ML infrastructure: Ask whether the provider has experience with model repositories, feature stores, vector databases, training pipelines, or model-serving infrastructure.
- Evidence automation: Find out how much evidence the platform collects automatically and what your team must provide manually.
- Continuous monitoring: Check how quickly the platform identifies failed controls between audits.
- Future frameworks: If you expect to pursue ISO 27001, ISO 42001, HIPAA, or PCI DSS, confirm that the provider supports the specific frameworks you need.
The key takeaway: choose a provider based on your actual ML stack, compliance roadmap, and audit requirements not simply its claims of being “AI-ready.”